Insider Trading?
- Thread starter GoJazz
- Start date
Looks like the teaparty express got sidetracked. All those new congressmen went to Washington sayin' they'd put a stop to profligate Federal spending and bailouts. Just enough fell into line with Management to vote for a deal to keep the bubble pumped up for a while more, raised our "debt ceiling" past the ratio to GDP that is judged as something we can pay back. Debt now in exhange for back-loaded promises of budget cuts, and a stacked "Super Congress" headed by the most profligate of all Presidents.
Meanwhile, the rating agencies have been linked abroad with insider moves against other national debtors, with the insiders all betting on the downgrades in the credit ratings.
That's the way Bubble Machines work. You establish influence by buy off our politicians and getting favorable governance/deregulation whichever is called for at the moment, you push some economic issue to some extreme, and then you change the game. You know when to make the bet, and when to sell out. The public finds out too late.
?!?
I believe you have pulled this idea of a set GDP-debt ratio being exceeded out of your ***. S&P's explicit statement is about the ability of our political institutions to manage problems. In their words "The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy." That sounds to me like the problem was NOT that the Tea Party caved too easily.
In fact, claiming that the downgrade is the result of a debt ceiling raise is the exact OPPOSITE of the warning Moody's gave the United States. They indicated the presence of the cap at all is what was causing them to review the US' credit rating. https://www.cnbc.com/id/43790768/Moody_s_Suggests_US_Eliminates_Debt_Ceiling
In other words the ratings businesses including Moody's only are concerned about the US being able to service its debt in relative short term. They are not making an assessment that our current spending plans are wise.
In the short term there would be less uncertainity if we didn't have debt limits.
Here's a very in-depth and (given that it has what I believe are stata screenshots) probably too technical explanation of S&P's ratings calculus.
https://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/why-s-p-s-ratings-are-substandard-and-porous/
One pretty funny bottom line conclusion:
https://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/why-s-p-s-ratings-are-substandard-and-porous/
One pretty funny bottom line conclusion:
GoJazz
Well-Known Member
I read that S&P was also upset because they wanted to see at least 4 trillion in debt reduction. Basically they didnt care if it was tax increases or reduction in spending. Seems funny that everyone is blaming everyone else when its both parties fault. Until I see someone who wants to Raise taxes and Decrease spending I won't believe any party seriously wants to solve the debt problem.
I completely agree. Cutting spending is great, imo, but it should be matched dollar for dollar in increased revenue. That's not related to my general belief that a libertarian system would be best, it's related to the current situation we're in that certainly wasn't created by libertarian practices.
GoJazz
Well-Known Member
What about a tax increase that completely goes to pay down debt. Then when out of debt it expires...My issue is you increase taxes and congress deciedes it has money to spend so they increase spending.
